And this is where I stopped reading. Nine times out of ten, enraged mother is code for "delusional harpy with too much time on her hands".

The fact that this woman would want to deprive her child of reading the first hand account of a girl her daughter's age who lived through one of the most significant periods in human history solely because it mentions genitalia is just pathetic. I doubt she would raise a stink if the book they were reading had to do with violence, racism and rape (To Kill a Mockingbird).

Besides, any 7th grader who claims they haven't discovered their genitalia is either lying or a quadriplegic.

lack of warmth:So I guess asking the school to use the Diary of Anne Frank (play version) would be just ridiculous. That is what I read back in school and never thought I was left in the dark about any part of the story. I guess you don't get the true picture of the fear and nasty nature of hiding from the nazis unless you read about the persons personal writings about their own genitals. There must be a point there about not knowing the full story unless the person telling it describes their genitals to you. That's okay, if reading about someone's personal thoughts about sexual discovery is what you need to understand a family hiding from the nazis then read on.

/not everything in a diary should be made public//just not good taste

As a historian I have rather firmly disagree. If your pursuing Anne Frank's diary as a historical document then *any* editing or censorship to it is a travesty. I've not read it, but simply having those passages in their show that even in the face of overwhelming danger that the normal preoccupations of adolescent self discovery applied, and allows you to compare it against historical norms of the time.

I'm firmly of the opinion that we need to be teaching students how to do history right in High School, that the discipline isn't memorizing facts and dates (you can look those up), but being able to reference information, draw out conclusions and detect biases in information. Then the students should be able to extrapolate, and employ the information to form, their own, conclusions and be able to defend those conclusions by citation and reasoning.

Any violation of the document degrades the ability of the students to do so, and there for is wrong.

Just Another OC Homeless Guy:Still, it would probably be best to use the edited version. I know it's considered rather silly to have any concern for the rights and preferences of sexually-repressed Christians, but since it is a public school (meaning her tax dollars help pay for it) then her desires in the matter should be considered.

No, her desires should not be considered. Just as I wouldn't want the local ditch digger making decisions on how to treat cancer.

I think that allowing stupid people to make decisions for a country just because their tax dollars fund it is a dangerous idea - and is the reason this country has so many problems. Taxpayers for the most part do not know what they want and are far too ignorant of issues to make an educated decision on what is truly best for the country.

Democracy sucks, but so does a dictatorship. It is really hard to find a happy medium where the stupid is filtered out though without giving a select few all of the power. That is why education is so important if you want to have some sort of a democracy. If you let idiots make decisions on how people are educated then you end up with more idiots making bigger decisions - see the modern Republican party and Tea-baggers.

lack of warmth:So I guess asking the school to use the Diary of Anne Frank (play version) would be just ridiculous. That is what I read back in school and never thought I was left in the dark about any part of the story. I guess you don't get the true picture of the fear and nasty nature of hiding from the nazis unless you read about the persons personal writings about their own genitals. There must be a point there about not knowing the full story unless the person telling it describes their genitals to you. That's okay, if reading about someone's personal thoughts about sexual discovery is what you need to understand a family hiding from the nazis then read on.

/not everything in a diary should be made public//just not good taste

Really? You don't think that a couple of paragraphs about a teen undergoing puberty helps a pubescent reader relate to the author? You don't think that it gives a deeper understanding about what frame of mind Anne was in and how she had to cope with the same things that all teens have to cope with only under very adverse conditions? Should her relationship with Peter have been excised from the book as well? After all, it was very personal and had little to do with the Holocaust.

In fact, if you think that The Diary of Anne Frank is about the Holocaust, you really need to reread it. It isn't. It's the story of a girl coming of age. Doesn't matter if it is set in Amsterdam or Beijing, WWII or 1776.

It is the story of a girl becoming a woman.

Basically it is "Are You The God? It's Me, Margaret" only with less menstruation, more Nazis, and set entirely in an attic.

Just Another OC Homeless Guy:I know it's considered rather silly to have any concern for the rights and preferences of sexually-repressed Christians, but since it is a public school (meaning her tax dollars help pay for it) then her desires in the matter should be considered.

/Libbies: Good taste? Good taste? We don't need no stinkin' good taste!

I don't get to decide precisely how my other tax dollars are used. Why should education be different? Considering we have a public interest in sexually aware and educated people, why should the vagaries of crazy or ill-informed parents be in any way incorporated into our educational system?

You don't like what public school is teaching your kids? Home-school them. Public school should be based on what's best for our children and our society, not what makes their parents happy.

And this is where I stopped reading. Nine times out of ten, enraged mother is code for "delusional harpy with too much time on her hands".

The fact that this woman would want to deprive her child of reading the first hand account of a girl her daughter's age who lived through one of the most significant periods in human history solely because it mentions genitalia is just pathetic. I doubt she would raise a stink if the book they were reading had to do with violence, racism and rape (To Kill a Mockingbird).

Besides, any 7th grader who claims they haven't discovered their genitalia is either lying or a quadriplegic.

I'm also sure she'd support her child's reading on the Bible. It condones genocide, polygamy, talks about masturbation, incest, and supports slavery.

I read that book in 7th grade. The pornographic nature made such an impact on me that now, as a 30 year old, I DIDN'T EVEN REMEMBER THAT WAS IN THERE.

Yes, I can see how this could damage the youth of America.

/Read Lord of the Flies in 8th grade. My biggest takeaway was that when boys do handstands their wieners move. Until that point I had a vague idea of it being immobile, much like a statue.//hey, my stuff didn't move when I did a handstand. It made sense to me.

Feral_and_Preposterous:Knowing several people from Michigan I can only think that her outrage is manufactured and the real problem is that Anne Frank is a member of an inferior race. The lady is smart enough to know that objection won't fly, though, so she came up with this little nugget instead.

Fark her and her boyfriend with the 88 IQ.

I see what you did there. Wish to subscribe to newsletter, with a gift subscription to said Holocaust Remembrance group.

fat boy:"There are little folds of skin all over the place, you canhardly find it. The little hole underneath is so terribly smallthat I simply can't imagine how a man can get in there, letalone how a whole baby can get out!"

"...Until I was eleven or twelve, I didn't realize therewas a second set of labia on the inside, since youcouldn't see them.

thought urine came out of the clitoris...When you'restanding up, all you see from the front is hair. Betweenyour legs there are two soft, cushiony things, alsocovered with hair, which press together when you'restanding,

separate when you sit down and they're very red andquite fleshy on the inside. In the upper part, betweenthe outer labia, there's a fold of skin that, on secondthought,

clitoris..."

Is that it? A description of the body is pornographic?

The lady should stop now. Her ignorance of the meaning of pornography, her disgust of the human body and her idiotic crusade are clear indications that she's a pathetic excuse for a parent and a human being . I pity her kids.

Michigan is no stranger to this kind of case. Consider 1972's Todd v. Rochester Community Schools, in which Bruce Livingston Todd sued the school district because he believed Kurt Vonnegut's "Slaughterhouse-Five" promoted an establishment of religion. The appeals court judges said merely mentioning religion does not promote an establishment thereof.

"Vonnegut's literary dwellings on war, religion, death, Christ, God, government, politics, and any other subject should be as welcome in the public schools of this state as those of Machiavelli, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Melville, Lenin, Joseph McCarthy, or Walt Disney. The students of Michigan are free to make of Slaughterhouse-Five what they will."

Knowing several people from Michigan I can only think that her outrage is manufactured and the real problem is that Anne Frank is a member of an inferior race. The lady is smart enough to know that objection won't fly, though, so she came up with this little nugget instead.

Dear stupid shrill whore:If you kept your complaint to "inappropriate to her daughters age group," I might consider your complaint. But calling it "pornographic" just makes you just look like a shrill stupid whore.

And this is where I stopped reading. Nine times out of ten, enraged mother is code for "delusional harpy with too much time on her hands".

The fact that this woman would want to deprive her child of reading the first hand account of a girl her daughter's age who lived through one of the most significant periods in human history solely because it mentions genitalia is just pathetic. I doubt she would raise a stink if the book they were reading had to do with violence, racism and rape (To Kill a MockingbirdThe Bible).

And this is where I stopped reading. Nine times out of ten, enraged mother is code for "delusional harpy with too much time on her hands".

The fact that this woman would want to deprive her child of reading the first hand account of a girl her daughter's age who lived through one of the most significant periods in human history solely because it mentions genitalia is just pathetic. I doubt she would raise a stink if the book they were reading had to do with violence, racism and rape (To Kill a Mockingbird).

Besides, any 7th grader who claims they haven't discovered their genitalia is either lying or a quadriplegic.

I'm also sure she'd support her child's reading on the Bible. It condones genocide, polygamy, talks about masturbation, incest, and supports slavery.

Don't forget the stoning!

When I was six, my Mom gave me a children's illustrated Bible for my birthday (early 1970's). Well, let me tell you, I read that Bible until it fell apart. The Old Testament had all these stories about sex, violence, genocide, etc. There was a drawing of David staring down at a naked Bathsheba, and a woman carrying the head of John the Baptist on a plate, which was oozing blood onto the floor. I think I perused the New Testament only once (boring), but I read the shiat out of the O.T. in that Bible. It wasn't really for six year-olds, but it WAS a children's Bible. I wish I still had it so I could scan you guys the photos, but it disintegrated years ago.

I guess my Mom thought it would be to my benefit to learn some religion, but years later she realized it might have been a little inappropriate. Plus, I grew up a non-believer, as well.

The lady from TFA would probably die of shock if she thinks Anne Frank is "pornographic." I'm pretty sure my Mother got me a copy when I was about 9 or 10, since clearly I could stand the "horror."

I read the "complete" edition of Anne Frank's diary. There's nothing pornographic about it. Yes, she talks explicitly about very personal things, including the changes in her body and such -- but nothing that her seventh grade daughter couldn't handle. I raised a daughter and wouldn't have had an issue with her reading this version of the book, even when she was in the seventh grade.

The folks in Northville, Michigan do know that we're in the 21st century now... Right?

EVERYBODY PANIC:The book is a fraud: "The New York Supreme Court awarded the well known American writer, Meyer Levin, $50.000 to be paid by the father of Anne Frank as an honorarium for Levin`s work on the Anne Frank Diary."

GIS for Anne Frank Diary Fraud will explain it all.

The Levin lawsuit was over his play based on her diary, not the book itself.

austerity101:You don't like what public school is teaching your kids? Home-school them. Public school should be based on what's best for our children and our society, not what makes their parents happy.

911Jenny: I read that book in 7th grade. The pornographic nature made such an impact on me that now, as a 30 year old, I DIDN'T EVEN REMEMBER THAT WAS IN THERE.

Yes, I can see how this could damage the youth of America.

/Read Lord of the Flies in 8th grade. My biggest takeaway was that when boys do handstands their wieners move. Until that point I had a vague idea of it being immobile, much like a statue.//hey, my stuff didn't move when I did a handstand. It made sense to me

desertfool: Granted I am a lot of years removed from reading the book, but I don't remember this at all. Unless my school had us read an edited version.

911Jenny and desertfool: it's not your memory failing you, I am 2 yr younger than jenny, and I never read those parts of the diary either. we read edited versions, Anne Franks relatives who published her diary felt that those passages were too personal for publication, as they knew her as the young girl she was (think about it, would you want to publish the portions of your daughters/nieces/sisters/cousins diary where she describes her self discovery for all the world to see. I wouldn't.) As new family members inherited the diary, they felt that restoring those segments would not only be truer to her life, but also would show the historical importance that in the face of politically motivated horrors, life went on in ways that can't be stopped. there was a fark link in the last couple months that was about the re-release of the diary with the removed portions left in place and unedited.

BTW I don't remember that part of Lord of the Flies, oh yeah, I do, but didn't give two shiats at the time, but when I saw titties in the 60's film of Romeo and Juliet I was totally stoked about it.

sorry about that. nothing personal, was looking for a word, that one didn't really work.As far as pejorative use, I was going for more pseudopedantic pontificators.....admittedly CHUD doesn't really fit, I mean, aren't the CHUD hungry for life?That's a little too gregarious here.

I am worried about the mother not reading the literature her duaghter does. I mean, this is a classic of the 20th century canon, not some R.L. Stein knockoff. the mother is only declaring her own incredible ignorance. I am saddened to think that nobody will confront her for being unliterate, and absolve the school because there is no reason to think parents would be unaware of that particular book's content.

SheltemDragon:lack of warmth: So I guess asking the school to use the Diary of Anne Frank (play version) would be just ridiculous. That is what I read back in school and never thought I was left in the dark about any part of the story. I guess you don't get the true picture of the fear and nasty nature of hiding from the nazis unless you read about the persons personal writings about their own genitals. There must be a point there about not knowing the full story unless the person telling it describes their genitals to you. That's okay, if reading about someone's personal thoughts about sexual discovery is what you need to understand a family hiding from the nazis then read on.

/not everything in a diary should be made public//just not good taste

As a historian I have rather firmly disagree. If your pursuing Anne Frank's diary as a historical document then *any* editing or censorship to it is a travesty. I've not read it, but simply having those passages in their show that even in the face of overwhelming danger that the normal preoccupations of adolescent self discovery applied, and allows you to compare it against historical norms of the time.

I'm firmly of the opinion that we need to be teaching students how to do history right in High School, that the discipline isn't memorizing facts and dates (you can look those up), but being able to reference information, draw out conclusions and detect biases in information. Then the students should be able to extrapolate, and employ the information to form, their own, conclusions and be able to defend those conclusions by citation and reasoning.

Any violation of the document degrades the ability of the students to do so, and there for is wrong.

I agree with you.

I also -- maybe because I was once an adolescent girl -- can't help wondering how mortified Anne Frank would have been, had she known her private thoughts about her dawning sexuality would one day be made public. And that her own father would read them.

megarian:JWideman: eyeq360: Krieghund: PreMortem: sno man: I suppose pointing out it was written by someone the same age as her little snowflake would be lost on this mom.AndThe lost pilot Helen Keller frowns on these shenanigans subby...

A blind pilot? I'm impressed.

It's amazing what she could do after she discover radium.

I thought Betsy Ross was the lost pilot. And that Betsy Ross discovered radium. Or was it Mary Lincoln who discovered radium while making the first American flag?

I have a dream. A dream that one day... whenever someone opens their mouth to say something so incredible... so completely *wrong*... that everyone around them will immediately drop what they're doing and start hurling their fists at them. Silently, without a word or pause.

csb:I've read a lot of books, but the only one that lead to parental complaints (left at my far-less-reading friend's house and found to the eternal horror of his mother) was One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovichby Alexander Solzhenitsyn, an important book detailing life in the gulag (one more important for today would be Darkness at Noon, a book on how torture was used by the Soviet prison/execution system). Apparently the language of the gulag (roughly similar to my boy scout camp) was too rough for my friend's tender years (who also was in said boy scout troop).

On the other hand, said friend introduced me to Piers Anthony. Once he had kids I had to tell him just how sick that guy is and that he really should think twice before telling his kids about him.

Yup, if your children never hear about genitals, they will never find their own and everyone will be safe. Then one magic day you will inform them about their genitals, preferrably the morning of their wedding and they can finally enjoy them in the safety of marriage.

lack of warmth:So I guess asking the school to use the Diary of Anne Frank (play version) would be just ridiculous. That is what I read back in school and never thought I was left in the dark about any part of the story. I guess you don't get the true picture of the fear and nasty nature of hiding from the nazis unless you read about the persons personal writings about their own genitals. There must be a point there about not knowing the full story unless the person telling it describes their genitals to you. That's okay, if reading about someone's personal thoughts about sexual discovery is what you need to understand a family hiding from the nazis then read on.

/not everything in a diary should be made public//just not good taste

When you sniff, can you only smell your own feces, or is your head so far up that you are effectively breathing your own gastric acid?

SheltemDragon:lack of warmth: So I guess asking the school to use the Diary of Anne Frank (play version) would be just ridiculous. That is what I read back in school and never thought I was left in the dark about any part of the story. I guess you don't get the true picture of the fear and nasty nature of hiding from the nazis unless you read about the persons personal writings about their own genitals. There must be a point there about not knowing the full story unless the person telling it describes their genitals to you. That's okay, if reading about someone's personal thoughts about sexual discovery is what you need to understand a family hiding from the nazis then read on.

/not everything in a diary should be made public//just not good taste

As a historian I have rather firmly disagree. If your pursuing Anne Frank's diary as a historical document then *any* editing or censorship to it is a travesty. I've not read it, but simply having those passages in their show that even in the face of overwhelming danger that the normal preoccupations of adolescent self discovery applied, and allows you to compare it against historical norms of the time.

I'm firmly of the opinion that we need to be teaching students how to do history right in High School, that the discipline isn't memorizing facts and dates (you can look those up), but being able to reference information, draw out conclusions and detect biases in information. Then the students should be able to extrapolate, and employ the information to form, their own, conclusions and be able to defend those conclusions by citation and reasoning.

Any violation of the document degrades the ability of the students to do so, and there for is wrong.

Yes, those passages go along way t showing how isolated she was and how she had to discover so much on her own. It might seem kind of odd out of context, but in the course of reading about an entire life being lived out in an attic with your immediate family, it all fits in to paint a picture that get diluted by its removal.

Satanic_Hamster:Dear stupid shrill whore:If you kept your complaint to "inappropriate to her daughters age group," I might consider your complaint. But calling it "pornographic" just makes you just look like a shrill stupid whore.

A book written by somebody in her daughter's age group could be honestly considered inappropriate for said age group? Really?

And this is where I stopped reading. Nine times out of ten, enraged mother is code for "delusional harpy with too much time on her hands".

The fact that this woman would want to deprive her child of reading the first hand account of a girl her daughter's age who lived through one of the most significant periods in human history solely because it mentions genitalia is just pathetic. I doubt she would raise a stink if the book they were reading had to do with violence, racism and rape (To Kill a MockingbirdThe Bible).

FTFY

Yes, but you see the Holy Bible is good wholesome Christian reading while The Diary of Anne Frank was written by a Jew. A JEW!!!

"There are little folds of skin all over the place, you canhardly find it. The little hole underneath is so terribly smallthat I simply can't imagine how a man can get in there, letalone how a whole baby can get out!"

"...Until I was eleven or twelve, I didn't realize therewas a second set of labia on the inside, since youcouldn't see them.

thought urine came out of the clitoris...When you'restanding up, all you see from the front is hair. Betweenyour legs there are two soft, cushiony things, alsocovered with hair, which press together when you'restanding,

separate when you sit down and they're very red andquite fleshy on the inside. In the upper part, betweenthe outer labia, there's a fold of skin that, on secondthought,